BarkingUnicorn:Pick: I just know he isn't going to only give $29K. I bet he gives them a $1 million. If he is a good hearted man.

He may end up "giving" much more when this year's support obligation is recalculated. And a thoughtful family court judge will order it placed in trust for the children, with an income stream to the custodial parent(s) for the kids' reasonable support until they turn 18.

Well you don't know what child support is, now do ya?

/you're right though.

He won 156 million? 31 million to the kids, 10 million now, 21 million when they turn 18.

Lady Indica:BarkingUnicorn: what_now: sammyk: Not everyone that owes back child support is a bad person subby.

If you've never been on the receiving end of family court you really do not know what you are talking about.

Ok, but he hasn't paid child support since 2009. So I'm ok with saying he's probably a bad person.

TFA doesnt say he hasn't paid any child support. It says there's a deficiency. While I am death on people who refuse to pay (and people who refuse to file claims on their children's behalf), I'm not prepared to lynch people who do the best they can. IDK what this guy is.

^ this ~ but I lean towards this guy being a douche because he hadn't paid support in years and was buying a non essential item.

And there are some dads who can't afford to pay...but they do other things to help parent.

Like buying the kid a $2 toy in hope of stimulating his mind, or a $2 lottery ticket in hope of doing very well by the kid.

Those who say Powerball is a waste of money should consider the odds that a $2 bus ride will result in a successful job interview these days. Then compare the job's payoff to the jackpot's and calculate the expected value of each $2 "investment."

what_now:Ok, but he hasn't paid child support since 2009. So I'm ok with saying he's probably a bad person.

I'll go one step further, and say he's a failure of humanity and a disgrace to the human race. So, naturally, he'd win the lotto. Nobody wins the lottery that deserves to. Nobody except that elderly couple I recall awhile back who donated it all to charity. You never have a person who thinks "I can help so many people with this money." Instead it's "Wow, I can buy so much bling and drugs now! YOLO" Frakkin disgraces.

same_old_mess:My ex-wife has to pay me child support, so I'm getting a kick.....

My ex-sister-in-law (skanky adulterous biatch) owes my older brother about as much as the Powerball winner owes in back child support payments. Said biatch never had any money to make said payments, but somehow she ALWAYS had enough money to buy herself a new car every few years, nice clothes, manicures, pedicures, spend $$ on dry cleaning, and throw huge parties for herself (and an annual birthday party for her son, who she had custody of two weekends each month, but always dumped off with her mom or some other relative because she was too busy partying).

My nephew is now 22. The Biatch remarried years ago, has a 7-year-old daughter with the poor sap who fell for her, and dumps the kid off with others every weekend so she can go partying.

I also have female friends who were screwed by their ex-husbands when it came to child support, in case anyone thinks I'm taking sides.

a_room_with_a_moose:BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: Madbassist1: a_room_with_a_moose: In WV, your CS payments go to the state and the state pays the custodial parent - after taking their cut, of course.

its that way in ohio too...

It sucks because neither parent has any say in the matter. I know of a case where the divorce was amicable and the custodial parent didn't want ANY child support.

State said too damn bad... because they wanted their cut, of course.

State said, "It's not your money to refuse, asshole." It's the child's. If the custodial parent has no use for it, it belongs in a savings account for the child.

The custodial parent was loaded and didn't need it.

For himself or the kids, I might add.

Also, CS is for the cost of raising the kid(s), not to put in a savings account for their adulthood. It won't be needed for college because the non-custodial parent will be on the hook for that, also.

I'm starting to think you may be overly judgmental, but I'm willing to keep the jury out on that one.

Jim_Callahan:Because a lottery ticket is like one damned dollar and probably the cheapest form of entertainment on the planet

I thought we'd already established the cheapest entertainment on the planet was surfing porn at the public library? As well as being an excellent way to avoid becoming a parent in the first place.

BarkingUnicorn:Those who say Powerball is a waste of money should consider the odds that a $2 bus ride will result in a successful job interview these days.

Ooh, look at Mr. Big here, who actually gets interviews when he applies for jobs. Must be all special or something. Just the other week, I applied for a job, and they sent three men to beat me with a sock full of snooker balls, in my own driveway. I was ecstatic that they had noticed my resume.

a_room_with_a_moose:BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: In WV, your CS payments go to the state and the state pays the custodial parent - after taking their cut, of course.

Are you referring to the $25 annual fee for CSE services, including the Family Support Registry? That's a federal thing, enacted by the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Thank Bush.

I'm not sure, but I think WV takes a percentage. I'm not in that boat, thank the FSM, but I'll check with my buddy that is.

There are welfare programs that have to be paid back, and repayments are taken out of child support payments as they are from any other income. IDK if your buddy has collected such benefits. Costs of enforcing child support orders may also be recoverable from the recipient, too. But it's not just "fark you, because we can."

No Such Agency:Jim_Callahan:Because a lottery ticket is like one damned dollar and probably the cheapest form of entertainment on the planet

I thought we'd already established the cheapest entertainment on the planet was surfing porn at the public library? As well as being an excellent way to avoid becoming a parent in the first place.

BarkingUnicorn:Those who say Powerball is a waste of money should consider the odds that a $2 bus ride will result in a successful job interview these days.

Ooh, look at Mr. Big here, who actually gets interviews when he applies for jobs. Must be all special or something. Just the other week, I applied for a job, and they sent three men to beat me with a sock full of snooker balls, in my own driveway. I was ecstatic that they had noticed my resume.

BarkingUnicorn:a_room_with_a_moose: BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: In WV, your CS payments go to the state and the state pays the custodial parent - after taking their cut, of course.

Are you referring to the $25 annual fee for CSE services, including the Family Support Registry? That's a federal thing, enacted by the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Thank Bush.

I'm not sure, but I think WV takes a percentage. I'm not in that boat, thank the FSM, but I'll check with my buddy that is.

There are welfare programs that have to be paid back, and repayments are taken out of child support payments as they are from any other income. IDK if your buddy has collected such benefits. Costs of enforcing child support orders may also be recoverable from the recipient, too. But it's not just "fark you, because we can."

It kind of is, actually. Why should someone making their payments or, in cases where no payment was asked for (or needed) subsidize the other deadbeats?

Especially since all of the rest of us are subsiding them in the form of our taxes (which I have never begrudged). Taking money for those programs out of CS payments is making non-custodials pay twice, once in their taxes, again with their CS payments.

a_room_with_a_moose: The custodial parent was loaded and didn't need it.

...

What part of "it's the child''s money" don't you motherfarkers get??

You're the one who isnt getting it. my ex was forced to pay me support. She's unemployed and dont have a pot to piss in. I made 250k last year. Situations like that become unconscionable. No way am I gonna take her money. My kids have a 529. I don't need her money, why would me (or anyone else) demand 50 bucks a week from her? Damn the bloodlust!

a_room_with_a_moose:State said, "It's not your money to refuse, asshole." It's the child's. If the custodial parent has no use for it, it belongs in a savings account for the child.

The custodial parent was loaded and didn't need it.

For himself or the kids, I might add.

Also, CS is for the cost of raising the kid(s), not to put in a savings account for their adulthood. It won't be needed for college because the non-custodial parent will be on the hook for that, also.

Your opinion is at odds with all child support statutes. Child support is not based upon the cost of keeping a kid alive until he's 18. It is based upon the presumption that parents have an obligation to devote a certain proportion of their incomes to their kids, whether it's spent on their current needs or saved for their future needs. Both parents, not just one. Neither parent has the right to deny a child its birthright.

BarkingUnicorn:a_room_with_a_moose: State said, "It's not your money to refuse, asshole." It's the child's. If the custodial parent has no use for it, it belongs in a savings account for the child.

The custodial parent was loaded and didn't need it.

For himself or the kids, I might add.

Also, CS is for the cost of raising the kid(s), not to put in a savings account for their adulthood. It won't be needed for college because the non-custodial parent will be on the hook for that, also.

Your opinion is at odds with all child support statutes. Child support is not based upon the cost of keeping a kid alive until he's 18. It is based upon the presumption that parents have an obligation to devote a certain proportion of their incomes to their kids, whether it's spent on their current needs or saved for their future needs. Both parents, not just one. Neither parent has the right to deny a child its birthright.

a_room_with_a_moose:BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: In WV, your CS payments go to the state and the state pays the custodial parent - after taking their cut, of course.

Are you referring to the $25 annual fee for CSE services, including the Family Support Registry? That's a federal thing, enacted by the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Thank Bush.

I'm not sure, but I think WV takes a percentage. I'm not in that boat, thank the FSM, but I'll check with my buddy that is.

There are welfare programs that have to be paid back, and repayments are taken out of child support payments as they are from any other income. IDK if your buddy has collected such benefits. Costs of enforcing child support orders may also be recoverable from the recipient, too. But it's not just "fark you, because we can."

It kind of is, actually. Why should someone making their payments or, in cases where no payment was asked for (or needed) subsidize the other deadbeats?

Especially since all of the rest of us are subsiding them in the form of our taxes (which I have never begrudged). Taking money for those programs out of CS payments is making non-custodials pay twice, once in their taxes, again with their CS payments.

Actually, it makes no difference in what the non-custodial parent pays; it comes out of what the child receives via the custodial parent. And that's another reason I hate GW and his minions.

But its a fee for services rendered and received, not a tax subsidizing others.

BarkingUnicorn:a_room_with_a_moose: State said, "It's not your money to refuse, asshole." It's the child's. If the custodial parent has no use for it, it belongs in a savings account for the child.

The custodial parent was loaded and didn't need it.

For himself or the kids, I might add.

Also, CS is for the cost of raising the kid(s), not to put in a savings account for their adulthood. It won't be needed for college because the non-custodial parent will be on the hook for that, also.

Your opinion is at odds with all child support statutes. Child support is not based upon the cost of keeping a kid alive until he's 18. It is based upon the presumption that parents have an obligation to devote a certain proportion of their incomes to their kids, whether it's spent on their current needs or saved for their future needs. Both parents, not just one. Neither parent has the right to deny a child its birthright.

My opinion may be at odds with the system that is making money off of their own decisions?

I'm shocked. The fact remains that a millionaire custodian does not need a few thousand a year off of the other parent for the kids.

Madbassist1:BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: State said, "It's not your money to refuse, asshole." It's the child's. If the custodial parent has no use for it, it belongs in a savings account for the child.

The custodial parent was loaded and didn't need it.

For himself or the kids, I might add.

Also, CS is for the cost of raising the kid(s), not to put in a savings account for their adulthood. It won't be needed for college because the non-custodial parent will be on the hook for that, also.

Your opinion is at odds with all child support statutes. Child support is not based upon the cost of keeping a kid alive until he's 18. It is based upon the presumption that parents have an obligation to devote a certain proportion of their incomes to their kids, whether it's spent on their current needs or saved for their future needs. Both parents, not just one. Neither parent has the right to deny a child its birthright.

a_room_with_a_moose: The custodial parent was loaded and didn't need it.

...

What part of "it's the child''s money" don't you motherfarkers get??

You're the one who isnt getting it. my ex was forced to pay me support. She's unemployed and dont have a pot to piss in. I made 250k last year. Situations like that become unconscionable. No way am I gonna take her money. My kids have a 529. I don't need her money, why would me (or anyone else) demand 50 bucks a week from her? Damn the bloodlust!

Plus it doesn't benefit the children for one parent to be destitute when they are being fully supported by another parent who can. Obviously there's exceptions for people who refuse to work, or are abusers of some sort...but generally speaking ^ this is the absolute right thing to do for the kids.

BarkingUnicorn:a_room_with_a_moose: BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: In WV, your CS payments go to the state and the state pays the custodial parent - after taking their cut, of course.

Are you referring to the $25 annual fee for CSE services, including the Family Support Registry? That's a federal thing, enacted by the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Thank Bush.

I'm not sure, but I think WV takes a percentage. I'm not in that boat, thank the FSM, but I'll check with my buddy that is.

There are welfare programs that have to be paid back, and repayments are taken out of child support payments as they are from any other income. IDK if your buddy has collected such benefits. Costs of enforcing child support orders may also be recoverable from the recipient, too. But it's not just "fark you, because we can."

It kind of is, actually. Why should someone making their payments or, in cases where no payment was asked for (or needed) subsidize the other deadbeats?

Especially since all of the rest of us are subsiding them in the form of our taxes (which I have never begrudged). Taking money for those programs out of CS payments is making non-custodials pay twice, once in their taxes, again with their CS payments.

Actually, it makes no difference in what the non-custodial parent pays; it comes out of what the child receives via the custodial parent. And that's another reason I hate GW and his minions.

But its a fee for services rendered and received, not a tax subsidizing others.

Even when the services were not wanted or needed? Also, why did you mention welfare (presumably to support the kids of deadbeat parents)?

a_room_with_a_moose: The custodial parent was loaded and didn't need it.

...

What part of "it's the child''s money" don't you motherfarkers get??

You're the one who isnt getting it. my ex was forced to pay me support. She's unemployed and dont have a pot to piss in. I made 250k last year. Situations like that become unconscionable. No way am I gonna take her money. My kids have a 529. I don't need her money, why would me (or anyone else) demand 50 bucks a week from her? Damn the bloodlust!

It's not about what you need. It's not about your sympathy for her. It's not about you at all!

a_room_with_a_moose:BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: In WV, your CS payments go to the state and the state pays the custodial parent - after taking their cut, of course.

Are you referring to the $25 annual fee for CSE services, including the Family Support Registry? That's a federal thing, enacted by the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Thank Bush.

I'm not sure, but I think WV takes a percentage. I'm not in that boat, thank the FSM, but I'll check with my buddy that is.

There are welfare programs that have to be paid back, and repayments are taken out of child support payments as they are from any other income. IDK if your buddy has collected such benefits. Costs of enforcing child support orders may also be recoverable from the recipient, too. But it's not just "fark you, because we can."

It kind of is, actually. Why should someone making their payments or, in cases where no payment was asked for (or needed) subsidize the other deadbeats?

Especially since all of the rest of us are subsiding them in the form of our taxes (which I have never begrudged). Taking money for those programs out of CS payments is making non-custodials pay twice, once in their taxes, again with their CS payments.

Actually, it makes no difference in what the non-custodial parent pays; it comes out of what the child receives via the custodial parent. And that's another reason I hate GW and his minions.

But its a fee for services rendered and received, not a tax subsidizing others.

Even when the services were not wanted or needed? Also, why did you mention welfare (presumably to support the kids of deadbeat parents)?

It is about the state making bank. And lawyers.

No, you can avoid being charged the fees by not using the services. The law that charges a $25 fee for having a case open with CSE also allows you to close the case and avoid the fee.

I mentioned welfare because some forms of it have to be paid back out of future income. Child support is counted as income for such purposes and docked accordingly. If you resent having your taxes subsidize deadbeat parents, then you should be glad to get some taxes back when they do pay support.

The fact remains that a millionaire custodian does not need a few thousand a year off of the other parent for the kids.

It's not about what the CP needs; it's about what is owed to the kids by both parents.

Keep telling yourself that.

In the case I mentioned and in madbassest1's case, the kids don't need it, wouldn't miss it.

I hate the idea that If my wife and I were to split and satisfactorily work everything out between us in terms of support and custody that the state would still get involved against our wishes to pay for an unneeded child advocate and services we didn't want or need.

You sound like a lawyer or a person getting payments.

If the money is for the kids, why doesn't the state make sure the money is spent on the kids, because, in many cases, none of it is spent on the kids.

stuffy:sammyk: Not everyone that owes back child support is a bad person subby.

If you've never been on the receiving end of family court you really do not know what you are talking about.

Unless he has something that shows the kid isn't his. He's a dick!

So a guy that loses his job and gets behind on his child support payments because HE HAS NO FARKING MONEY is a dick? Of course it's his fault. He should not have farked up the economy so much that it resulted in massive unemployment. What a dick!

BarkingUnicorn:a_room_with_a_moose: BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: BarkingUnicorn: a_room_with_a_moose: In WV, your CS payments go to the state and the state pays the custodial parent - after taking their cut, of course.

Are you referring to the $25 annual fee for CSE services, including the Family Support Registry? That's a federal thing, enacted by the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Thank Bush.

I'm not sure, but I think WV takes a percentage. I'm not in that boat, thank the FSM, but I'll check with my buddy that is.

There are welfare programs that have to be paid back, and repayments are taken out of child support payments as they are from any other income. IDK if your buddy has collected such benefits. Costs of enforcing child support orders may also be recoverable from the recipient, too. But it's not just "fark you, because we can."

It kind of is, actually. Why should someone making their payments or, in cases where no payment was asked for (or needed) subsidize the other deadbeats?

Especially since all of the rest of us are subsiding them in the form of our taxes (which I have never begrudged). Taking money for those programs out of CS payments is making non-custodials pay twice, once in their taxes, again with their CS payments.

Actually, it makes no difference in what the non-custodial parent pays; it comes out of what the child receives via the custodial parent. And that's another reason I hate GW and his minions.

But its a fee for services rendered and received, not a tax subsidizing others.

Even when the services were not wanted or needed? Also, why did you mention welfare (presumably to support the kids of deadbeat parents)?

It is about the state making bank. And lawyers.

No, you can avoid being charged the fees by not using the services. The law that charges a $25 fee for having a case open with CSE also allows you to close the case and avoid the fee.

I mentioned welfare because some forms of it have to be paid back out of future income. Child support is counted as income for such purposes and docked accordingly. If you resent having your taxes subsidize deadbeat parents, then you should be glad to get some taxes back when they do pay support.

I never get any taxes back and I specifically said I don't resent paying taxes. Also, in WV you get no choice about using those services. Divorce with kids, kids get advocate, you must pay to the state, state gives custodial parent money after taking their percent.

State makes bank, regardless of whether the parents have worked it out already or not.

Been fun. Gotta put the kids to bed and give the wife a call. She is away this week.

The fact remains that a millionaire custodian does not need a few thousand a year off of the other parent for the kids.

It's not about what the CP needs; it's about what is owed to the kids by both parents.

My wife doesn't work. I guess I should tell her that she isn't living up to her financial obligations to our child (I won't cause she's got that crazy Latin blood).

What's "owed to the kids" is a loving and nurturing childhood in which they are provided for in the best manner that their parents can afford. If the custodial parent is able to provide financially for the child and doesn't need the money from the other parent, that shouldn't be a problem. It is far more important for the non-custodial parent to continue to be in the child's life than to pay 100 bucks a month into a savings account, especially if it means working some menial job in order to just pay the support but miss out on time with the children.

The fact remains that a millionaire custodian does not need a few thousand a year off of the other parent for the kids.

It's not about what the CP needs; it's about what is owed to the kids by both parents.

Keep telling yourself that.

In the case I mentioned and in madbassest1's case, the kids don't need it, wouldn't miss it.

I hate the idea that If my wife and I were to split and satisfactorily work everything out between us in terms of support and custody that the state would still get involved against our wishes to pay for an unneeded child advocate and services we didn't want or need.

You sound like a lawyer or a person getting payments.

If the money is for the kids, why doesn't the state make sure the money is spent on the kids, because, in many cases, none of it is spent on the kids.

Bloated system is bloated - and not very effective.

The entire legal system will keep telling you that.

So it's OK for me to raid my kid's piggy bank because he won't miss it and doesn't need it?

I paid child support for 10 years and received it for six. Never had the slightest problem in either position because my ex and I understood what child support is and we both love our son.

You and I are in no position to say what is spent on most kids. The courts get into that only in the most blatant neglect cases because otherwise, bitter and greedy payers would be demanding audits every month, trying to lower their payments and/or just make the ex's life Hell.

No Such Agency:BarkingUnicorn:Those who say Powerball is a waste of money should consider the odds that a $2 bus ride will result in a successful job interview these days.

Ooh, look at Mr. Big here, who actually gets interviews when he applies for jobs. Must be all special or something. Just the other week, I applied for a job, and they sent three men to beat me with a sock full of snooker balls, in my own driveway. I was ecstatic that they had noticed my resume.

The fact remains that a millionaire custodian does not need a few thousand a year off of the other parent for the kids.

It's not about what the CP needs; it's about what is owed to the kids by both parents.

My wife doesn't work. I guess I should tell her that she isn't living up to her financial obligations to our child (I won't cause she's got that crazy Latin blood).

What's "owed to the kids" is a loving and nurturing childhood in which they are provided for in the best manner that their parents can afford. If the custodial parent is able to provide financially for the child and doesn't need the money from the other parent, that shouldn't be a problem. It is far more important for the non-custodial parent to continue to be in the child's life than to pay 100 bucks a month into a savings account, especially if it means working some menial job in order to just pay the support but miss out on time with the children.

I like the way you think. You made my point in a much better manner than I could have.

The fact remains that a millionaire custodian does not need a few thousand a year off of the other parent for the kids.

It's not about what the CP needs; it's about what is owed to the kids by both parents.

Keep telling yourself that.

In the case I mentioned and in madbassest1's case, the kids don't need it, wouldn't miss it.

I hate the idea that If my wife and I were to split and satisfactorily work everything out between us in terms of support and custody that the state would still get involved against our wishes to pay for an unneeded child advocate and services we didn't want or need.

You sound like a lawyer or a person getting payments.

If the money is for the kids, why doesn't the state make sure the money is spent on the kids, because, in many cases, none of it is spent on the kids.

Bloated system is bloated - and not very effective.

The entire legal system will keep telling you that.

So it's OK for me to raid my kid's piggy bank because he won't miss it and doesn't need it?

I paid child support for 10 years and received it for six. Never had the slightest problem in either position because my ex and I understood what child support is and we both love our son.

You and I are in no position to say what is spent on most kids. The courts get into that only in the most blatant neglect cases because otherwise, bitter and greedy payers would be demanding audits every month, trying to lower their payments and/or just make the ex's life Hell.

Good for you. In WV, the state would have taken a cut of every one of those payments.

People that can work this shiat out without courts and lawyers and the state playing middle man with the payments should have every right to do so. In WV, they do not.